metalgearfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Miscellaneous groups
Is it jst me or is The boss suposed to be in the green berets? :I don't remember hearing anything on it. If you can provide a source (such as a quote or what-not) that would be great. --Fantomas 18:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC) Isn't the section on the Militiamen big enough to be it's own article? :I'd have to say yes; it's very large.--Richard 21:09, 18 March 2008 (UTC) should we compactify some of these groups? there are several instances where we have groups and their subgroups listed seperately. for instance we could make US Navy Seals a section of US Navy. I think in that state they should still be on this page but at least then they could be expanded into an article. --Drawde83 19:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC) DARPA redirects here, but there is nothing about it in the page. --22:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC) :I believe the DARPA page is mis directed I think we have a DARPA page somewhere. I will fix that. - Justin 22:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC) PMC Mercenaries The PMC section is big enough (and important enough) to warrant it's own article in my opinion. I'm going to go ahead and do it now, but if anyone has any objections let me know. I might need some help re-directing links though. --Fantomas 15:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC) Green Berets vs Delta Force I'm wondering if the to have become confused. I can't remember big boss or Roy Campbell being mentioned as being part of Delta Force? I had wondered if they were just names for the same unit but there are two different pages on wikipedia. --Drawde83 04:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC) Re: Image Size Just wanted to cover the big blank space beside the contents, without intruding on the formatting of the article's main text. But if it must be smaller, it's no big deal. --Bluerock 18:51, January 4, 2010 (UTC) :That's funny because that's why I made it smaller, so it wouldn't intrude on the actual text of the article. Probably because I'm using an old monitor, my pages may look different to yours in my browser? You can change it back if you wish. --Fantomas 18:59, January 4, 2010 (UTC) ::Hmm, possibly. Anyway, I'll just leave it as it is, didn't really consider that might be the case. --Bluerock 19:07, January 4, 2010 (UTC) Mercenary Okay, can someone explain why the Mercenary article was moved to miscellaneous groups? I'm asking because Mercenary isn't even covered in the miscellaneous groups article (specific mercenary groups are covered, but not mercenaries themselves). I think we may need to make the Mercenary article its own separate article again since if it isn't going to be in the Miscellaneous groups article, there really isn't a point to it being merged with the miscellaneous groups article, plus there's more to mercenaries that could fill an article than just what mercenary groups exist, if that's the reason for the merge. Weedle McHairybug 16:27, June 29, 2011 (UTC)